agentleFS
Sign inStart free
lgzarturolgzarturo/codeconductor/.agents/skills/evaluation/SKILL.md

evaluation

Skill0 starsChanged 26 days agoMITView on GitHub

A scorecard measures the deliverable against eight weighted criteria. Spec quality checklists are reviewer-owned. "Seems right" is not a verdict. Pass threshold: weighted score >= 2.0 and no criterion at 0. NOT for rewriting specs (reviewer checklist) or for implementing code. The CLI is always npx cc-codeconductor. openspec analyze can auto-suggest acceptance / tests on --from-diff. Archive needs PASS when review is required. Outcomes append to .codeconductor/evaluation/outcomes.jsonl. - [ ] Scorecard created from diff (or explicit scores) - [ ]…

22 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use bdi-mental-states, hosted-agents and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • Downey6689Skill

    bdi-mental-states

    Transforms external RDF context into BDI mental states. Invoke when modeling beliefs, desires, and intentions.

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • Downey6689Skill

    hosted-agents

    Guidance for hosted/sandboxed agents. Invoke when running background agents in isolated VMs or multi-client setups.

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • DVwebBiz11Skill

    self-improvement-loops

    This skill should be used when the harness, scaffold, workflow, or optimizer itself is the optimization target: recursive self-improvement (RSI) loops, meta-harnesses, self-improving harnesses that mine their own failures and propose bounded edits, evolutionary or population-based search over agent scaffolds, acceptance gates for self-modifying systems, and agentic context evolution where the mechanism that produces context is versioned and evolved. Route governance of a single autonomous loop (locked surfaces, durable logs, rollback, novelty gates, approval boundaries) to harness-engineering, measurement and quality-gate design to evaluation, judge design to advanced-evaluation, and remote sandbox infrastructure to hosted-agents.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • mjunaidcaSkill

    building-chatgpt-apps

    Guides creation of ChatGPT Apps with interactive widgets using OpenAI Apps SDK and MCP servers. Use when building ChatGPT custom apps with visual UI components, embedded widgets, or rich interactive experiences. Covers widget architecture, MCP server setup with FastMCP, response metadata, and Developer Mode configuration. NOT when building standard MCP servers without widgets (use building-mcp-servers skill instead).

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • mjunaidcaSkill

    building-chat-interfaces

    Build AI chat interfaces with custom backends, authentication, and context injection. Use when integrating chat UI with AI agents, adding auth to chat, injecting user/page context, or implementing httpOnly cookie proxies. Covers ChatKitServer, useChatKit, and MCP auth patterns. NOT when building simple chatbots without persistence or custom agent integration.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • +7 more from mjunaidca

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 21 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    After implement/review, before openspec archive

    line 20

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 21 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Evaluation

Overview

A scorecard measures the deliverable against eight weighted criteria. Spec quality checklists are reviewer-owned. "Seems right" is not a verdict.

Pass threshold: weighted score >= 2.0 and no criterion at 0.

When to Use

  • After implement/review, before openspec archive
  • Comparing models or prompt versions
  • Proving the workflow tools still work (suite-run)

NOT for rewriting specs (reviewer checklist) or for implementing code.

Process

The CLI is always npx cc-codeconductor.

scorecard create --task BC-001 --from-diff
scorecard record --task BC-001 --verdict PASS --score 2.5
scorecard list | aggregate | models | regression | matrix | compare-models
scorecard prompt-diff 0.4.0 0.5.0 --agent architect
scorecard experiment start --suite harness-v1
scorecard suite-run --suite workflow-gates
scorecard suite-run --suite hook-guardrails
scorecard suite-run --suite scorecard-signals

openspec analyze can auto-suggest acceptance / tests on --from-diff. Archive needs PASS when review is required.

Outcomes append to .codeconductor/evaluation/outcomes.jsonl.

Common Rationalizations

RationalizationReality
I'll fill the scorecard by hand without a diffUse --from-diff and runner evidence.
Suites are optional toyssuite-run is the workflow tool that proves gates.
Handmade TDD JSON is fineThe runner rejects it.

Red Flags

  • PASS with a criterion at 0
  • Archive without a recorded scorecard when review is required
  • Declaring the workflow ready without suite-run or scorecard record

Verification

  • Scorecard created from diff (or explicit scores)
  • Verdict PASS / REVISE / REJECT recorded
  • For process changes: scorecard suite-run --suite hook-guardrails (and workflow-gates / scorecard-signals when those gates changed)

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

Check your setup, free